home
If the Tryers of Fact (none / 0) (#18)
by RickyJim on Sun Jan 21, 2024 at 12:25:16 PM EST
had to hand in a report explaining how they came to their conclusions, American justice would improve in accuracy. The American legal establishment has always opposed any effort to improve the quality of the tryers, like having the jury pool consist of people that have to pass a test showing they know how to evaluate evidence or have juror be an elected office.

Parent
You can put those ideas up for debate (none / 0) (#24)
by Peter G on Sun Jan 21, 2024 at 07:12:21 PM EST
when you write your new Constitution. But what you suggest would not be a "trial by jury" as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.

Parent
Even if we went to that extreme (none / 0) (#27)
by McBain on Mon Jan 22, 2024 at 09:38:58 AM EST
trials would still be decided by people who would be bombarded with negative publicity about unpopular defendants.  If the tryers, as you say, have to worry about the consequences of a not guilty verdict to themselves or their community, it's not a fair trial.  

Parent
That is an Argument for Jury Elitism (none / 0) (#29)
by RickyJim on Mon Jan 22, 2024 at 10:21:13 AM EST
If juries were selected from a much smaller group than the general public, it would easier to protect them from the wrath of those opposed to their decisions and thus they would be more likely to base them on the evidence. By the way, Switzerland elects the jury pool.

Parent
Interesting (none / 0) (#77)
by Yman on Sun Jan 28, 2024 at 02:15:35 PM EST
No idea who "the American legal establishment" is, but it sounds like people who are educated in the law and know that a system using "tests" and ignoring juries would violate the Sixth Amendment.

Also good to know there is zero evidence that the Peterson jury was influenced "the media, activists and special interest lawyers."

Parent

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft